Why Science and Theologians Should Work Together - Research Paper Example

Why Science and Theologians Should Work Together Introduction Science refers to a logical enterprise that establishes and systematizes knowledge in a variety of testable justifications and forecasts about the world (Hairston 1). Theology refers to the logical and rational study of religion and its power. It also refers to the study of the nature of religious truths, or the academic profession acquired by completing education in religious studies (Cobb 1). Theology can be studied in seminaries, universities or school of divinities. “The aim of Science is accepting legitimate relations amongst natural phenomena. Religion refers to a way of living within a bigger framework of sense” (Thyateira 1). This paper will research on the reasons why scientists and theologians should work together and how they are compatible. The article will also research on the similarities and the differences between science and theology. Finally, it will show how science and religion can both function together to be productive. In recent use, the term science regularly refers to the means of tracking knowledge, not only the knowledge taught itself (Cobb 1). It is often taken to be equivalent to physical and natural science (Friberg 1). It is, thus, limited to those branches of study that involve the occurrences of the material world and their principles, occasionally with indirect exclusion of pure mathematics. Augustine of Hippo referred to theology as a discussion concerning or reasoning about God (Thyateira 1). Richard Hooker referred to theology as the science of divine things. The phrase can, however, be applied in a variety of diverse disciplines or forms of discussions. Theologians use diverse forms of argument and analysis to help appreciate, clarify, experiment, critique, promote or defend any of the countless religious issues. These diverse forms of analysis are spiritual, philosophical, historical and ethnographic topics among others (Thyateira 1). Why Scientists and Theologians Should Work Together Theology has two pedigrees. One was the religious beliefs of the inhabitants of Israel as arbitrated to the Gentile world through Jesus and His apostle Paul. The other was the complicated thought of the Gentile world, expressed in the Greek beliefs. In contrast with the current era, the sciences are still immature (Cobb 1). But such as it was, they were markedly integrated into beliefs. Hence the exploitation of Greek beliefs was also exploitation of Greek science. Science should reflect on what the Bible suggests because it is all about understanding the future. Scientists have to reflect on the dependability of religion. Studying the Bible will enlighten them on end-time procedures and what they can anticipate. The precise date when these events start is indefinite. In Christian theology, the term rapture refers to the period that Christ will take His followers to Heaven, both those who had passed away and those who are alive. “Science refers to an attempt of appreciating creation. Biblical belief entails our relation to the Creator. Since we can study about the Creator from his creation, religion can study from science” (Hairston 1). The discussion is complex since some theologians referred to as Pre-millennialists claim that the rapture will be carried out before the tribulation. Mid-point theologians believe the rapture will take place at the midpoint of three and half years, and post-millennialists believe that it will be after the millennium. There have to be joint trust in merging their disparities in genuine faith. Bible teachers deem that Christians have the bigger corrections to craft. Some scientists are atheists. Most of them want the truth to triumph and are prepared to believe Biblical affirmations only if they do not infringe on confirmed science. Scientists should observe how God has performed his work in the past to find out how he will function in the future. God is consistent (Cobb 1). If people study accomplished prophecies, they will get confidence when they discover them in the precise place, manner and time as forecasted. Science and theology should work together to understand how end-time proceedings will affect everybody. Evolution assists in explaining the past, but forecasts nothing in relation to the future. Compatibility of Science and Religion Science and religion are not compatible. The main predicament between religion and science lies in the judgment of religion as it is practiced and science is a principle (Baggini 1). Science as a principle needs an open mind and the readiness to question theories, but in the real sense scientists are just as closed-minded and stubborn as the normal human being. Science is not accurately objective and calm when it comes to the sole scientists. This is where the ideal and practice assemble, however, when it comes to sheer review scientists stand alone. In the end, every scientist has to present their ideas and data to others for evaluation (Baggini 1). If the only support they end up putting out is their own belief, then their field will progress without them. If nevertheless, their stubborn persistence has directed them to appealing data that no one else has stumbled upon, then they will be justified. Therefore, no matter how narrow a person may be, the system itself tends to stay disinterested and exceptionally wide. When comparing religion and science, critics have asked what should people place on the side of science; the reality or the ideal. Some have said that it is a tough question to reply. But, the preference of the ideal is highly reasonable (Baggini 1). There are appealing arguments for selection of the reality, that is, the struggles real scientists face in their daily routine. On the other hand, the principles of science are expressed as an immense deal in the overall constitution of science. Hence, it is not, as though, the ideal is just a vision. Every religion is diverse, and even inside religions there are wide distinctions. All people have are the reality of religion. That realism is remarkably diverse from not only the principle of science, but also the reality. Hence it is fair to place reality and not idealism in religion. Similarities between Science and Religion Science and religion has various similarities, mostly concerning their theories (Hairston 1). The similarities are as follows. Their theories put things in a causal perspective wider than that presented by common sense. Common sense searches for clear relations between things. Scientific theories put out stunning links. For instance when an individual fails an exam, a common mind would state that the individual did not study. Science, on the other hand, would seek to prove that the individual was suffering from fear of failure or feelings of insecurity (Hairston 1). A second similarity is that, science and religious theories carry corresponding roles in everyday life. Religious and scientific explanations harmonize common sense clarifications. Individuals do not submerge themselves in ambiguity. Common sense is simpler (Hairston 1). For instance, treating a headache with an aspirin rather than applying psychotherapy has less constrains compared to visiting the doctor. The third similarity is that all theories split up the unitary items of common sense into pieces, and then puts the final elements in a wider causal context. That is they first summarize an exam, then reintegrate. The fourth similarity is that during developing of the two principles, the human mind seems pushed to draw inspiration from similarities from the puzzling observations and certain happenings. The fifth similarity is that both theories were set on comparison between puzzling observations and recognizable happenings. It is only a restricted aspect of such happenings that are included into the resultant model (Hairston 1). Differences between Science and Religion The significant distinction between religion and science is that the leading one comes with absolute statements. These statements can neither be verified nor refuted (Hairston 1). Science, on the other hand, evolves from relative statements and truths that can be confirmed and proven to be false (Hairston 1). This means that science has to grow, so as to replace the moderately untrue theories with better ones. Religion argues that it has unlimited knowledge on everything. Science does not claim to be extremely resourceful. All scientific assumptions are in essence refutable, and in the end, all assumptions will be refuted. At least it can be proved that there is a limiting case in which the assumption does not work. Religion cannot be refuted (Hairston 1). This does not add to its confirmation. It cannot also be proved. If something is neither confirmed nor refutable, then it is inadequate. It can only have significance to individuals, who prefer to be uninformed, and do not want to venture into complicated knowledge. It is also useful to individuals who would rather have faith in something that is disprovable. Science is for individuals who realize that to obtain knowledge, loads of labor has to be put in and even if they engage in a lot of work someone else may refute part or all of their work. Religion is for individuals who claim to know everything. Religion, for instance, suggests that God created the world. Those who support religion did not do any work to put out that view, and any other theories are disputed. To religious people, this is the truth and nothing but the whole truth (Hairston 1). How Science and Religion can Work Together For more than two centuries, leading scientists and liberal thinkers have argued against or downplayed religion (Friberg 1). Prominent exceptions to this trend were numerous, but the message was obvious; religion should craft way for science. In essence, religion and science should work mutually if people want to resolve disputes in the world today. “Religion without science is blind, science without religion is lame," Albert Einstein. Ultimately, as the inhabitants of the world develop into an extensive scientific literacy, religion will have to be taught extensively so as to co-exist with science. It seems liable that religious groups that work closely with science will become highly victorious drivers of social change and development. Consequences of religion and science working together are exceptionally clear (Friberg 1). A number of them are as follows. Religion and its facts can only be comprehended through application and attempts. This includes systematic execution of those facts, consideration of the results, manifestation on the evaluations and finally, reimplementation of what is learned. Although the exposed facts of a religion may be proved in origin, the interpretations of those that embrace its teachings are undeniably not (Friberg 1). Personal versions, painted as it were by both cultural and individual theories, have no weight. The meanings of the facts can be found expressed through means that are scientific in their techniques. Personal proposals, plus a range of means of engaging in executing those facts, are vital if they are to be appreciated. When this is carried out on a global scale, the pace of learning and information that can be achieved is nothing short of astonishing. "Customary religious creation accounts and evolution are balancing. Religion and science jointly can merge a rich tapestry of fresh significance for our age" (Baggini 1). Conclusion A crucial task in moving forward is entirely to embrace past experiences of the inhabitants of this world and value the natural world and the people’s roles. This is not possible without a proper understanding of religion. People need to grasp the history of religion plus the role it plays in those diverse thoughts people address through the different manners they describe as religious or spiritual. Understanding of the world is insufficient without an acceptance of religion. The thought that the development of science shadows everything that came previously and renders them insignificant and unimportant is an outdated thought from an earlier phase in the historical development of a world society. Although as false as any myth, it had its position, and it carried out its task. Now it overlooks and degrades the lives of innumerable individuals around the world. These people have grouped themselves into religious alliances and pushed towards moral virtue, goodness and ran away from the urgings of their lower self and enthusiasms. In conclusion, Thyateira an Orthodox stated that "He who has Science also has religion and he who does not have science has religion" (Thyateira 1). Works Cited Baggini, Julian. Religion's Truce with Science Can't Hold. London: The Guardian Press, 2010. Web. Cobb, John. Revising Both Science and Theology. Claremont: Claremont School of Theology, 2010. Web. Friberg, Stephen. Why We Need Both Science and Religion 14: Working Together for the Future. California: Abdu’l-Baha’s Press, 2010. Web. Hairston, Russell. Reconciling Science and Christian Theology. Kingston ON: Religious Tolerance Press, 2010. Web. Thyateira, Gregorios. “Theology And Science” Orthodox Christian Comment. Oxford: OCC Publishers, 2005. Web. Read More